Max Patrick Hamon on the Skewed Nose

imageMax Patrick Hamon writes with illustrations (I modified the format to fit the blog space):

Skewed nosed cheiropoietic & acheiropoietic Christ faces?

By way of an illustrative reply to the bloggers who thought the skewed nosed Christ face on Justinian II’s solidus obverse (685-695 CE) was a mere “minting error” and/or “directly influenced by the Christ Pantocrator, here are the perfect photographic overlap of the two ‘non made by hand’ Holy Faces (Turin Sindon + Manoppello Veil) by German iconographer, Sister Blandina Schlömer and the Christ Pantocrator of Saint Catherine’s Monastery (6th century CE). Now the reader can just guess what are the prototype and its two possible copies.

The coin image shown at right is repeated below the other two images in the same size as the other images. (Click “Read more” if necessary.)





19 thoughts on “Max Patrick Hamon on the Skewed Nose”

  1. This image comparison does say SOMEthing. Unless of course you ask so-called “Bizantine Art historian” Davour Aslanovski .

    I do hope what my archaeocryptological eye has detected appears very clear now to Matthias, Angel and Yannick. If it still doesn’t, nope.

  2. Could this hint to the presence of the Manoppello veil in Constantinople in the 7th-13th centuries? Or perhaps earlier. I am just giving a plausible range. Also, notice that the Manoppello veil appears to be shifted left and right vertically across the face depending on which photograph you are using. That is, the veil is certainly not “solid” so that its trellis can be partially shifted at one vertical location. But since the veil is between glasses I cannot explain why this is happening. Perhaps the veil was removed from its glass for some of these photographs. In any case, we have to be careful about slight curves (e..g, along the nose) since that might be the sustaining medium (i.e., the byssus trellis) that has these curves. I would need to include many photographs here to show this sifting and I am not sure this is the right place. But that can be looked up on the Web by anybody interested on this subject.

    1. Reminder:

      The Veil of Manoppello has NEVER been removed from his glass since the 17th century CE.

      Forensically speaking (and WELL EVEN BEFORE the Manopello Veil face was scientifically examined), the slight derivation of the fleshy tip of the TS man’s nose was detected (in the1970s).

      Iconographically speaking, the same feature happens to be ALSO detectable on the MV face.

      In the mortuary/morgue, corpses with “a skewed nose” are a well known fact. It is mainly due to having a corpse fin in in a zipped up body bag that was originally too small and cause excessive pressure on the defuncted’s face.


  3. In terms of additional spy clue, e.g. you rotate the numismtic “three-four strands of hair” 90° clockwise then you’ll get the mirrored form of the Greek letter epsilon-shaped like TS man’s forehead clot as a BONUS!

  4. Shall I endlessly repeazt: Ancient observers/copysts would in fact report as observations and/or copy BOTH what they did really see and what they believed they saw.

  5. They may also have specific agendas (e.g. “to clean up” the original swollen Christ face in blood).

  6. Todo el lado izquierdo de la cara en la moneda CORRESPONDE al lado derecho del Hombre de la Sábana. La BARBA es más corta porque está arrancada.

    Los grabadores de moneda estaban muy acostumbrados a la interpretación de las imágenes NEGATIVAS, ya que grababan en negativo.

    Se aprecia todo mejor en el negativo de la moneda, como ha indicado Ron.

    Carlos Otal

  7. The visual fact is, anyone observing the TS man’s face will (at first and maybe even second and third sight) see an ‘almost’ normal nose.

    However a very close examination of the face in terms of geometrical projection made from a life-size photograph tells us ‘a quite different story’:

    To the sole exception of the bony areas of the eye-sockets and nasal septum, all the rest of the face shows irregular features and displacements.

    Reminder here:
    – the TS man’s face was compressed by a sindon, sweat veil and skull cap (not to mention the possible recurr to a smal “jaw-box” made of three wooden pieces to keep the mouth closed, see my reconstruction).

    Now a forensic examination of the nose area reveals that in this operation the cartilaginous or fleshy rounded part of the nose would have been squashed.
    Now a forensic examination of the Sindon face tells us this area is not only squashed but also turned to the left with the TS man’s face right profile appearing as if embedded in his facial image..

    As early as the 3rd-4th c. CE, in the Roman catacombs, this archaeological fact had already been noticed (a few months ago I sent Dan via email, an illustration backing up my find). Hope he will publish it to make my oint clear here.

  8. The true fact is we can detect no less than 3 accidental characteristics:

    1/- Skewed nose slightly deviated on the observer’s left

    2/- Swollen right cheek

    3/ -TS man’s epsilon-shaped forehead clot DISlocated in centre hairline of the forehead with stylisation as a double stranded quiff of dropping hair

    Now put together these three minute details make a crucial evidence not unlike a fingerprint leading to the identification of the source-object(s): the Turin Sindon face in conjunction with the Manoppello face.

  9. Mario you wrote: “Could this hint to the presence of the Manoppello veil in Constantinople in {the late 7th-first half 10th] centuries”.

    More likely, happy few Constantinople artists (among whom “our sculptor/engraver?) went on pilgrimage to Edessa (then the Parthian Rome in the hands of the Arabs), had access to the Image of Edessa and could study it more closely..

    1. Then, the presence of the veil of Manoppello in Constantinople could explain the minting of these coins with Christ looking like on the Shroud. This presence makes the Shroud more likely in Edessa than Constantinople prior to 944. The departure of the veil of Manoppello (to protect it from the iconoclasts) from Constantinople to Rome would also reinforce the need of the Byzantine emperors to bring the image of Edessa to Constantinople.

Comments are closed.